dispersants, oil?

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/2010/11/201011872121964396.html

By Welcome2Wonderland, November 9 at 6:20 pm Link to this comment

Mostly agree with you about NPR and certainly about MSNBC.  TD being a liberal
website, I assumed those sources would be more in line with your preferences.

But every source I’ve seen (AJ’s implications aside) agrees the oil is far more toxic
than the dispersant.  If you can find a credible source that disagrees then feel free
to post.  Anecdotal evidence doesn’t prove otherwise since they aren’t scientific
though it could spur further research into the subject if there’s real question. 
Though I’m curious why you’d use AJ as your source in the first place if you
believe it’s propaganda.  call me baffled.

‘have discovered severe damage to coral reefs near the location of the Deepwater Horizon’s blown-out wellhead.’

no s**t?
.................................
fat freddy forgot to include this.

“Most showed no changes from previous visits.

But when the ship crew focused underwater cameras on colonies seven miles southwest of the BP leak, images of stricken corals, covered with a brown substance, popped up on the screen.”

By Welcome2Wonderland, November 7 at 7:27 pm Link to this comment

“you pretty much have to be brain dead if you think that, at least, 1.9 million
gallons of widely banned toxic Corexit dispersants isnt going to do permanent
damage to coral and whatever the hell else it touches.”

Well I don’t pretend to be an expert on dispersants and their toxicity.  But I’ve
seen ample evidence from experts that the dispersants are less toxic than the
oil itself.  Perhaps you trust Aljazeera more than MSNBC or NPR - but nowhere
in your article does it actually say that the dispersants are more toxic than oil. 
Instead, it seems to draw an inference from a 25 yr. old study on supposedly
related compounds in lab animals and “workers”, along with anecdotal evidence
of “symptoms”.  But without seeing the study, I’m afraid that’s a pretty weak
link.

Here’s a quote from an NPR interview with an author that wrote an article on the
subject in August:  “Mr. GOODELL: Well, that’s one of the big questions. The
real issue is not so much the toxicity of the dispersants, although that is
somewhat of an issue. The real problem is that the dispersants break the oil up
into much smaller particles that sink down into the water column of the Gulf.”

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129061703

btw - what news sources besides Al Jazeera do you consider not to be
propaganda?

Yeah Marshall, if for any reason the reefs actually do survive the oil then we ought to use underwater nukes to see if we can finish them off.

Actually, the planet is impervious to anything we can do to it.  Our species has the right, no, the DUTY, to subjugate it and maybe once in a while this means we have to unleash the full power and fury of US business and industry on it just to show it who’s boss.

DISCLAIMER:  No sentient beings were harmed in the creation of this hyperbole.

The largest nuclear bomb the US ever detonated couldn’t permanently destroy the
coral reefs at Bikini Atoll… some leaked natural resources in the Gulf are all of a
sudden “R.I.P.”?  You gotta be kidding.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24132798/

gerard:

Maybe you thought I meant: by the _current_ government.  Obviously, it doesn’t
look like this government will change that. I meant: by a government elected by
voters who want such changes.

rollzone

How about we stop giving subsidies to oil and coal, and stop leasing “land” to the oil companies, and stop providing them with liability insurance on the taxpayer’s dime?

We both know that will never happen. Even if there were 535 Ron Pauls and Dennis Kucinichs. There is no line between government and big corporations like BP. Just look at who the major shareholders of BP are. The top 25 shareholders are mostly asset management companies. Most of these asset management companies are subsidiaries of the big banks. The only way to end the big corporations and the big banks, is to end the government, or at the very least, end the Federal Reserve. But we can’t even get an audit of the Fed, can we?

From the linked article:
...were surveying coral communities they have studied for several years. Most showed no changes from previous visits.

So, the headline, R.I.P. Gulf Coral Reefs, is just sensationalistic bullshit? And you wonder why there are AGW deniers? Good work, TD.

hello. a simple cohesive national energy policy would
structure a direction for corporations to invest in. it
amazes me that BetterPollutants managed to use secret dispersant formulas to mutate coral into mucus
producers- which will finally kill all of humankind.

MeHere:  “Structured by government” specifically how?

Can you make any possible suggestions as to who and how.  The present government seems pretty unlikely to do anything because it is too eager to uphold the “rights” of oil corporations to pollute at the expense of all life forms on the planet, including the two-leggeds.

Looks like the two-leggeds are going to have to shift for themselves, come up with a plan and go for it.

It will take scientists a very long time to have a clear or clearer picture of the
consequences of the oil spill. In the meantime, the issue of “the separation of oil business and state” will remain a non-issue. And the consumption of unnecessary, oil-based products will continue to increase as soon as the economy improves. As scientists are saying, it is no longer a matter of individual efforts. Changes need to be structured by government.